Islam and evolution with Professor Shoaib Ahmed Malik

Professor Shoaib A Malik discusses his book Islam and Evolution Al-Ghazālī and the Modern Evolutionary Paradigm. Dr. Shoaib is Professor of the Natural Sciences at Zayed University, Dubai. He studies the intersection of science, Islam and philosophy. His book on Islam and evolution can be read for FREE here: www.academia.edu/47762640/Isl...
Chapters:
0:00 - Intro
0:23 - Topic of the Stream
0:55 - Information about the Guest
2:22 - Overview of the presentation
4:42 - Creationism vs Intelligent Design
5:34 - Evolution: A Basic Outline
10:51 - Do Biologists deny evolution?
20:49 - Approach to the relationship between Islam and Evolution
22:02 - Two Filter Tests for evolution in Islam
24:58 - Four Positions on evolution
25:32 - Creationism
27:58 - No Exceptions
28:41 - Human Exceptionalism
30:06 - At what time did Adam PBUH exist?
33:04 - Adam Exceptionalism
46:50 - Quranic vs Scientific Perspective
54:48 - Signs of Design in Creation
(Paul's "No Design 🙄" memes)
1:00:25 - Theological Validity:
Metaphysical Compatibility
1:01:40 - Concept of Randomness
1:05:15 - Scriptural Comparability
1:07:28 - Intelligent Design
1:26:39 - Closing Statements
You Can Support My Work on Patreon:
/ bloggingtheology
My Paypal Link:
www.paypal.com/paypalme/blogg...
Follow me on Twitter:
/ freemonotheist

[@asadullahsaaid3794]

*Timestamps for Chapters:* 0:00 - Intro 0:23 - Topic of the Stream 0:55 - Information about the Guest 2:22 - Overview of the presentation 4:42 - Creationism vs Intelligent Design 5:34 - Evolution: A Basic Outline 10:51 - Do Biologists deny evolution? 20:49 - Approach to relationship between Islam and Evolution 22:02 - Two Filter Tests for evolution in Islam 24:58 - Four Positions on evolution 25:32 - Creationism 27:58 - No Exceptions 28:41 - Human Exceptionalism 30:06 - At what time did Adam PBUH exist? 33:04 - Adam Exceptionalism 46:50 - Quranic vs Scientific Perspective 54:48 - Signs of Design in Creation (Paul's "No Design 🙄" memes) 1:00:25 - Theological Validity: Metaphysical Compatibility 1:01:40 - Concept of Randomness 1:05:15 - Scriptural Comparability 1:07:28 - Intelligent Design 1:26:39 - Closing Statements SUBHANALLAH ❤️🤍❤️ Very Informative Discussion _May Allah ﷻ reward you for your efforts._

[@bigman8673]

lol as always SAAiD to the rescue. jzk khair

[@asadullahsaaid3794]

@@bigman8673 وَإِيَّاك ‎☺️😊

[@LuqmansReacts]

Lol! paul's no design 🙄😅

[@ecai8362]

Thank you Check my playlist

[@owaissheraz]

@@asadullahsaaid3794 how do you make tgem all the time.... You certainly almost listen to everyone of them

[@Monamie44]

what an intelligent young man, Mr Shoaib! He made everything simple to understand through his outstanding presentation and explanation. Extremely beneficial episode.

[@wwp4414]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/jHW7Y5-whbuAntE

[@fbbinoire201]

@Al Mudarabah but remember that maibe not all species evolved , most of them apeared in the cambric explosion without previous chains

[@graybow2255]

I would like to say, sincerely, thank you, Paul. You have introduced me to great minds and beneficial knowledge that has strengthened and deepened my faith. May Allah the Most Generous accept our good deeds and forgive our sins and gather us in His Jannah. Aameen.

[@BloggingTheology]

You are very welcome

[@falsesectslikeshiaarejudeo6543]

@@BloggingTheology Allah is 1 & made us needy pairs - Quran 112 :1 & 36 :36. Re: life tree evolution. 1. how did self-copying become mating if there is no Creator God?? 2. & before how did no 1 cell being become dual cell? (no mechanism!) 3. Why's dna & rna co-op languages if no distinct Creator? this evolution's void! Hence life is made by non living separate parts with info via a distinct Creator! Be aware of financed studies for determined outcomes! Term [evolution] has ambiguity, so ppl use that for their own purpose. Micro is like a blue eye having a brown eye one, is ok! Macro is like interbreeding canines is ok. Life tree, is main disagreement, is spontaneous generation w/ goal posts, is fake!!

[@ibmlenovo1]

Aameen

[@owaissheraz]

@@BloggingTheology u can also invite ppl from discovery science channel like stephen Meyer, Michael B or paul nelson etc

[@ibmlenovo1]

@@owaissheraz Better would be to invite professor Rafiq Akhtar from Pakistan.

[@arabianseagull]

One of the best "debates/sessions" I have heard/found very interesting about "Islam and Evolution" Mr. Paul and Professor Shoaib Ahmed Malik. Thank you.

[@abdebnadam6237]

The video is batil. The man spoke from Ashari mystic perspective which is lead many ppl like sufis to pray to other then Allah. His view that Adam might not have been the first man or mated with other monkeys is contradicted in Quran 30 :21 which says your wives are from you!

[@abdebnadam6237]

Allah is 1 & made us needy pairs - Quran 112 :1 & 36 :36. Re: life tree evolution. 1. how did self-copying become mating if no Creator God? 2. & before how did no 1 cell being become dual cell? (no mechanism!) 3. Why's dna & rna co-op languages if no distinct Creator? this evolution's void! Hence life is made by non living separate parts with info via a distinct Creator! Be aware of financed studies for determined outcomes! Term [evolution] has ambiguity, so ppl use that for their own purpose. Micro is like a blue eye having a brown eye one, is ok! Macro is like interbreeding canines is ok. Life tree, is main disagreement, is spontaneous generation w/ goal posts, is fake!!

[@truehikma]

@@abdebnadam6237 30:21 And among His signs is this: He created for you mates from yourselves, so that you might find comfort in them. And He ordained between you love and kindness. In that are signs for those who reflect. [Azwaaj = Husband + Wife, that are mates to, and complement, each other’s personality] Wives are not from you! The discussion started off well telling us that the signs of Allah mankind has observed and discovered point to an evolutionary process but as we are talking about man, then the rational, intellectual aspect gets overruled by the absurd understanding of the Qur'an that copies the Bible story of Adam and Eve. First human, other hominids, Neanderthals, children mating others, etc has to be mixed in and mess up the clearly allegorical verses of the Qur'an about the transformation of a sub-species of animal in to the thinking, self aware, humanity. Sorry, I take back 'thinking', If you have an objection to the Ashari then you will not like this: In the introduction to his history of the world written by Ibn Khaldun (born 1332, died 1406 CE,) called” The Muqaddimah” he writes:- “One should then look at the world of creation. It started out from the minerals and progressed, in an ingenious manner to plants and animals. The last stage of minerals is connected with the first stage of plants, such as herbs and seedless plants. The last stage of plants, such as palms and vines, is connected with the first stage of animals, such as snails and shellfish, which have only the power of touch. The word “connection” with regard to these created things means that the last stage of each group is fully prepared to become the first stage of the next group. The animal world then widens, its species becomes numerous, and in a gradual process of creation, it finally leads to man, who is able to think and to reflect. The higher stage of man is reached from the world of monkeys, in which both sagacity and perception are found, but which has not reached the stage of actual reflection and thinking. At this point we come to the first stage of man.” Over 400years before Darwin, by a muslim! Shall we reject this because they may not have been 'proper' muslims even if it agree with well researched science?

[@kurdistanijunior]

@@abdebnadam6237 Oh no another daeshi here. The vast majority of scholars in Islam are and have been asharis you dim-witted bigot

[@aklimurraza2626]

@@abdebnadam6237 you’re right but Paul has asked a lot of the right questions to show the fallacy of these arguments.

[@user-kj8yl6sn2z]

Brother . I hope you will do an interview with the American Prof. Richard Mortel, professor of Islamic history and interested in archeology in the Arabian Peninsula, who was an assistant priest and converted to Islam. He has been working in Saudi Arabia for 46 years. Perhaps the talk about the story of Islam, Islamic history, prophetic monuments, Arab and American culture, aspects of disagreement and agreement between Islamic and Western culture ... to be a cultural, historical, literary, archaeological, social, etc. issue. ?

[@bossssss]

My God, there are some very intelligent people out there. Ma Sha Allah. Subhanallah. What Allah has created no one will be able to recreate. He has created a human being with the ability to think, ponder, build, formulate and use logic and much more. I get goose pimples when I think of it

[@Kriby-is-a-man]

You saved my imaan

[@bereal2366]

I really enjoyed the whole conversation , simply amazing insightful discussion ,, Jazaka ALahu khyran Both my brothers Paul and Pr. Shoaib .

[@abdebnadam6237]

children of Adam only mate with each other see Quran 30 :21, and Adam was clearly the first man! view : *Yaqeen Promotes Human Evolution and Calls Me a LIAR!! Debunking Their Nonsense | Part 1*

[@zahraabuji4901]

So excited for this interview Paul, was wondering abt the topic of Evolution and Islam, and here you are with another interview, Allah brings us answers when we ask Him something, even without saying out aloud. Im commenting before starting the video! Im sure its going to be really interesting, just like your other videos! Thanks again!❤

[@abdebnadam6237]

after watching it I saw how littel the speaker knew, and how bad the Ashari ideology is that it can make up stuff...

[@midnacici]

@@abdebnadam6237 Do you recommend watching this video? I'm about to watch it but I'm afraid of syubhat it might has.

[@Maro-servant-of-god]

@@midnacici I strongly recommend you to watch Dr. Eyad Qunaibi... By far, he's the most brilliant scientist I know to ever refute all hoaxes & myths of evolution.

[@abdebnadam6237]

@@midnacici The video is batil. The man spoke from Ashari mystic perspective which is lead many ppl like sufis to pray to other then Allah. His view that Adam might not have been the first man or mated with other monkeys is contradicted in Quran 30 :21 which says your wives are from you!

[@abdebnadam6237]

@@midnacici there is a brother who asked simple questions to refute evolution from a scientific point of view... I will post it let, me know if it helps!

[@samibizzari1273]

Alhamdulillah, excellent presentation and discussion. Was hoping to see more of Prof. Shoaib's work online and was very glad to see this topic covered- on one of my favorite channels no less. Thank you Paul for opening up such essential discussions.

[@LuqmansReacts]

I have been looking forward to this ❤ jazakhallahu khairan Paul!😊🙏🏿

[@guejemba]

Deep respect and thank you Paul and prof Shoaib. Discussion of the year! 👍

[@ikmaxi]

Shoaib Ahmed Malik, you are a jewel! May Allah bless you and increase you. As always, thank you, Paul.

[@mohammadbilani]

Just wow! such an intelligent guest! Thank you for introducing him to us Paul!

[@abdoleh986]

What a wonderfully intellectual conversation; keep up the great work Paul and guest.

[@Saad-rt6bb]

Went to university with Bro Shoaib, remember him giving khutbas at Jummah.

[@user-cd9gk7lj9p]

I bought him a hamburger

[@plung3r]

Excellent choice for interview, thanks brother Paul for your efforts for enlightening us through your guests and videos. Barak Allah feek ❤️❤️

[@ZZ-ls5hv]

How I wish millions more subscribe to this channel. May Allah SWT bless u Paul

[@wudafek8561]

The gift that keeps on giving

[@biqas]

Absolutely brilliant! Thank you Gentlemen and May Allah bless you.

[@mohammedkhan3338]

MashaAllah! Very interesting and complicated subject indeed. Thanks

[@muhammadsaad-ul-haq2210]

One of the best discussions here on KZbin. Quite informative.

[@abdebnadam8241]

The video is batil. The man spoke from Ashari mystic perspective which is lead many ppl like sufis to pray to other then Allah. beastiality if of T-mud! His view that Adam might not have been the first man or mated with other hominids is contradicted in Quran 30 :21 which says your wives are from you!

[@garaad9806]

JAK.👍💯 to both of u br. Paul and Br. Shoaib. It was great, enlightening discussion. Appreciate ur efforts. Keep up the great work, inshallah.

[@isalutefamille]

Thank you Paul & Prof Shoaib. Very enlightening topic.

[@sacredrider]

Paul sir, you asked some very good questions about his points that came to my mind straight away, thank you

[@notadane]

Excellent interviewing, Paul. Your interjections and comments were very "intelligently designed". I especially liked how you quoted the design references (aayaat in the Quran) where God says "We created..." "Do you not see the signs...?" whereas the speaker says that the alternative is "possible" in Ashari theology. Your corrective to Ashari kalam arguments were very welcome.

[@abdulkaderalsalhi557]

A very interesting and illuminating useful dialogue and presentation. Thanks for both of you. Well done Professor Shoaib, Good Luck, God bless you

[@naturegirl4803]

Really grateful to you to get this book through you. I am always in look out for such books on the very topics. Thanks again.

[@Fahad-gf1wx]

Ur indian too

[@MohamedShou]

Wow another great podcast and very educational need to rewatch this a couple of times. Learned so much thanks Paul and Professor Shoaib Edit: and thank you Professor Shoaib on the free book you let us download 😁

[@ckotty]

Bravo!!! For me, this has been "the best" interview on your channel to date. The reason being the groundbreaking content. Dr. Shoaib's presentation is honest and valid, from where I stand. The Judaic view doesn't allow the existence of Adam until about 6.000 years ago, rendering it incompatible with science. This marvelous interpretation portrayed by my new hero, Dr. Shoaib, grants more credibility simply because it doesn't refute proven scientific findings about the ages assigned to early hominins by anthropologists. It also allows for descendants of Adam to have "interbreedind" with earlier members of the genus "homo", giving place to today's human kind. A lot more important than it may appear at a glance. Dr. Shoaib A. Malik: many thanks for your work and for sharing it with us. It is extraordinary" food for thought ". Much obliged. 👍🏽😘 Paul, where do you find them mate? This gentleman is a gem. Big hug for you too. 👍🏽😘 May God guide us through the path of the righteous... God bless

[@kenkaneki9138]

I cant agree with some of what he was saying, "its possible for Adam's descendants may have intermingled with other hominin" citing reasons as the bottleneck of two cant make a population, this is just wrong. We know that Eve pbuh gave birth in twos and those two were prohibited of marrying each other so apparently they knew of this phenomenon from Allah and this is one of the miracles so not everything has to conform with the model we understand from science because miracles are out of the realm of rationale which is why they are miracles. We know that this world is a test for the children of Adam then are are those other hominins that Dr. Shoaib mentioned who are not descendants with Adam not bound by the test? but if they were intelligent enough and looked human enough to interbreed with children of Adam and lived in this world then are they also here to be tested as a different creation from Adam and Eve? We will fall into these absurdities just to reconcile with rationale when we know miracles are done by Allah and are outside of the realm of rationale. In the Quran it says we created you from a single pair of male and female so putting the possibility that there were other hominins that Adam and eve's descendants might have intermingled with is against the Quran. If the children of Adam had intermingled with other hominins who are not descendants of Adam then these other hominins are creations from God and we are also their descendants as well so why is Allah addressing the children of Adam only and not the other hominins in the Quran? Why is Allah saying we created you from a single pair of male and female and did not add the other pair which the other hominins descended from? according to the possibility dr shoaib put we are not only the children of Adam but also another pair who started the people children of Adam intermingled with. Then we can ask the same question to the first pair who are the ancestors of those hominins that intermingled with children of Adam. Then you can say those ancestors had intermingled with another species as well, then we can ask the same question again and fall into the absurdity if infinite regression.

[@mrwhojr9144]

@@kenkaneki9138 Salam aleikum couldn’t write in a better way you are right and the good thing is you don’t need a academic level of understanding to come to this conclusion or understand this truth Alhamdulillah.

[@kenkaneki9138]

@@mrwhojr9144 Aleikoum Al salam akhi, Wallahi its sad for these things to be slighted as you see there are people believing that there is a possibility without critical thinking then they might spread this misinformation to others. Its just irresponsible to put it out there because some people will take an academic work's conclusion as face value.

[@andym70]

The science today will tell you the interbreed between 2 different species will produce a sterile being that can’t reproduce. Assuming what you said is correct the interbreeding will not survive unless the species of the 2 parents survive as well that kind will die out if one of the parents die out…. Example the mule is a sterile being and it is the results of the interbreeding between a horse and a donkey. Right there your idea dies out

[@azilius5302]

@@kenkaneki9138 yes you are absolutely right and you explained the flaw well. May peace be upon you✨

[@odeebob7826]

Great episode thank you brothers for such excellent discussion, May Allah bless and reward you and all those involved for all your effort

[@hoopoe9629]

Another fascinating topic and discussion. Thank you, Paul.

[@fahimqazi4638]

7. And lastly, there are several leading scientific theories that question critical aspects (mechanisms) of macroevolution. While these theories do not outright disprove the occurrence of macroevolution, they do however put the mechanisms for macroevolution in serious doubts. For example, the Chaos Theory, which questions the concept of adaptation to the environment driven by natural selection, implies that environment does not produce complex adaptations, and says that evolution is chaotic. The Punctuated Equilibrium Theory casts serious doubts on Darwinian gradualism. The Tangled Tree or Lateral Gene Transfer Theory casts serious doubts on the idea of Tree of life and splitting (speciation) that require only vertical gene transfer which is based on pure lineages/common ancestry. The Convergent Evolution Theory casts serious doubts on common ancestry. All this means that we have a statistically impossible theory that we do not exactly understand how it works. Richard Dawkins ignored this in his famous book, The Evidence for Evolution. Jerry Coyne also ignored these theories in his book, Why Evolution Is True. With all the above-mentioned problems, how can macroevolution be considered a fact? Why not mention all these counter-scientific theories in the books of evolution as taught in schools and colleges? Why is macroevolution (often inaccurately referred to as just evolution) advertised and preached as an undeniable fact when the above theories have challenged many critical aspects of it? Why do scientists use statistics to prove every single scientific law, but then ignore the glaring fact that macroevolution is statistically impossible? If evolutionists don't tell us about such counter-theories, they're making evolution look like blind faith, not science. Why should I leave the perfectly rational belief in a Creator for a statistically impossible theory whose mechanisms we do not exactly know or agree on? In the absence of a decent scientific explanation of how we got here, let's not become so desperate and dogmatic that we dream up of empirically impossible scenarios that are very unscientific and laughable. There’s a group of scientists who are reject Darwinian mechanisms of macroevolution (dissentfromdarwin.org/). No mechanisms that truly explain macro-evolution. Probability is zero. Rationally problematic (circular dependencies). That's macro-evolution that we're asked to blindly believe in. Macro-evolution is nothing but fairy-tales. We're stuck in the bubble called universe. At the end of the day, how can science know how we got here when we're locked in a closed system? We cannot get out, there’s no escape. The only way to know how we got here is to escape the universe which is impossible. God remains the ONLY logical and sensible explanation.

[@markward3981]

I am not convinced of neo Darwinian Evolution to the degree to sell Islamic theology or even rethink. I see wholes in it. Also the more the scientific community uncovers the more questions and contractions arise however , scientists like theist fall into dogmatic stances which they slow to let go of.

[@daonedaonly942]

None of these disprove evolution. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make with the chaos theory but 1)punctuated equilibrium casts doubt on darwinian gradualism but it does not throw out evolution. It is simply another way to describe how evolution occurs. 2) The tangled tree theory also does not disprove evolution but rather points out how complex it may be. It simply posits that our model of HOW evolution occurred may be flawed and incomplete, not that evolution itself didnt occur. Horizontal gene transfer is another mechanism of evolution. 3) Convergent evolution is the process by which distinct species develop analogous structures. How does that in anyway disprove evolution?

[@aliammar2926]

Macro evolution is not possible if there was macro evolution happening in the past from one ancestor to changing into other ancestors there should be millions of internmediate species and there should fossiles to those intermediate species that should be found it's not like that a common ancestor decided lets say I will change into a fish you change into a cat you chamge into dog. Let's say something from past changed into a girrafe we see today then there should be millions of fossile that should present evidence for the development of the neck from a small to a long neck and at least we should be able to find some fossiles of some intermediate evolution but there is no such evidence. Yes evolution within the same species can happen and may be within the same species animals can co create but still there species will not entirely change into other. Evolution is evident but it is within the same species a human will always evolve into a human not into an ape, or a dog, or a cat.

[@misriya4147]

I'm always shocked how they just disregard the statistical impossibility of evolution

[@justsaying444]

I really enjoyed this presentation. Cleared up a lot of things. May Allah bless you for this effort, Paul Sir.

[@abdebnadam6237]

after watching it I saw how littel the speaker knew, and how bad the Ashari ideology is that it can make up stuff... children of Adam only mate with each other see Quran 30 :21, and Adam was clearly the first man!

[@abdebnadam6237]

the speaker brought up some ignorant things Daniel haqiqatjou refuted. view : **Yaqeen Promotes Human Evolution and Calls Me a LIAR!! Debunking Their Nonsense | Part 1**

[@hassanishaq1998]

Outstanding presentation by dr.shoaib malik !! ....made this issue much clear ! Thanks a lot Paul for this session ! God bless ! ❤️🙌

[@ah47464]

What is the position of Dr sohaib my brother?

[@solidsh1933]

Thank you Mr. Paul for your great efforts. I would like to suggest having prof. Iyad Qunaibi as a guest to shed light on other prespectives about Evolution and Islam. It will be of great benefit to all to have the full picture from all prespectives.

[@mentalismification]

Great episode, Paul. I especially enjoyed the interesting discussion between you and your guest around intelligent design, general design, and contingency. Perhaps "science" can be simply regarded as the means that God granted to us to explain phenomena within the human comprehensible range -- cumulatively evolving through human history, yet ultimately limited by its very definition. After all, we interact with the material world relying on our limited senses (e.g. human audible or visual ranges). I am hopeful that soon enough it will be easier (than not) to understand that the dichotomy between science and religion is a false presumption to begin with. Muslims didn't seem to have this issue up to the mid 13th century! In fact, it wasn't a problem at all until the torch of scientific discovery (civilization) was passed on to Christian Europe during Renaissance. That's when the clash between science and religion came to exist, where scientific facts shattered the (perhaps not so righteous) dogmas! No wonder that for the last 2-5 centuries science became associated with an atheistic point of view. Alas! Perhaps it's time to slowly reclaim that torch and reposition science where it belongs in the greater scheme of creation. Thank you for your effort to enlighten, Paul. May Allah reward you in this "dunia" life and "al-akhirah". Apology for a rather lengthy comment.

[@BloggingTheology]

👍

[@raheedrm]

Thank you brother Professor Shabbir Akhrar Islam.and the secular mind A phylosiphy of Islam Sounds like a great book with a real islamic perspective.

[@B-Mike]

The actual title is “The Quran and the Secular Mind A Philosophy of Islam” by Dr Shabbir Akhtar.

[@swlehji]

Wonderful explaination Dr. Malik. Absolutely beautifully put.

[@nadyaamandautari]

I've been interested in this topic.. Thanks Mr.Paul 😀😀😀

[@zatheonladdie5715]

This is amazing, ma sha Allah! Allahuma barik!

[@rsza5911]

Brilliant.......this lecture comes in the wake of foundational (BT) lectures and interviews that prepared me by removing my myopic lenses and allowed for an unbiased interpretation of this presentation. Thoroughly enjoyed this approach by Dr Malik as it somehow removed the disconnect between my religious beliefs and the scientific narrative.

[@ziyaulansari2759]

​@Al Mudarabah That's actually completely wrong. The Qur'an does not refer to the myth of evolution. You cannot reconcile truth with falsehood: You should watch this series; kzbin.info/www/bejne/r6Pdh6SKqZita5I

[@ziyaulansari2759]

@Al Mudarabah Bro I don't have the time.. can you summarize what is central to the series? Do you have the view that the Qur'an confirms evolution?

[@g7k993]

@Al Mudarabah stop posting that nonsense in every comment 🤨

[@ziyaulansari2759]

@Al Mudarabah I disagree bro. You are reading into the verse. That has nothing to do with evolution.

[@nonyelmossa4407]

Thanx for both of u 🤲🏻 God bless u amen 🌺🌺

[@S40WBS]

Fascinating discussion and debate! 👏🎓

[@canhaktan9674]

What does Islam tell us? 1)Where we came from. 2)What is our purpose. 3) How to fulfill that purpose. 4)Where we are going. One of the first questions people start to ask when their fitrah activates is "where did I come from and how did I get here". This is the presupposition that Allah(swt) created us with. Do you really think that Allah(swt) wouldn't clearly tell us our origins and leave out such a crucial point? This is a simple question that I think everyone needs to ask themselves when it comes to this matter.

[@saudal-mutawa3197]

LOVED THIS, Ma Shaa' Allah! I take the same position as the Professor when it comes to the subject of evolution. I'm also very cautious about "Scientific Miracles in the Qur'an" as I fear they can be time bombs to a lot of people's faith. Thank you, Paul. I love your channel.

[@foreversurfingthenet2641]

Saud Al-Mutawa The Quran attempts to describe embryology, but fails on so many levels... Firstly, It's impossible for male fluid to attach itself directly to the woman's womb,!!! and it's impossible for male fluid to transform into a blood clot as mentioned in v 23-13/14. ''placed a drop of fluid'' in a secure place, then We developed the drop of fluid into a clinging clot 'of blood'. Furthermore, there's not one reference to the male spermatozoa in the Quran. Nor is there any mention of the female ovum.. In total, that's four mistakes...... However, the Quran's attempt to describe the embryonic process exactly matches the Greek explanation ...... So the question is, where did Mohammed really get the information on foetal development? According to the Muslim historians, Ibn Abi Usaybia and al-Qifti, a doctor named al Harith Ibn Kalada , who was the most celebrated graduate of Jundishapur, became a companion of Muhammed. He traveled through Yemen and then Persia where he received his education in the medical sciences and was intimately acquainted with the medical teachings of Aristotle, Hippocrates and Galen." He became famous partly as a result of a consultation with King Khosrow of Persia, and later became a companion of the Prophet Muhammed himself, who sought medical advice from him. Mohammed also sent his sick friends to consult him. The fact that Mohammed's description of foetal development perfectly matches Dr al Harith Ibn Kalada's description, as well as Aristotle's, Hippocrates' and Galen's is far too much of a coincidence... Bearing in mind that all five (six, if you count Allah) were proven wrong centuries later, also clearly demonstrates that Allah, who supposed to know absolutely everything, clearly.........doesn't!!

[@foreversurfingthenet2641]

Saud Al-Mutawa V29-41 ''The example of those who take allies other than Allah is like that of the spider who takes a home, and indeed, the WEAKEST of homes is the home of the spider, if they only knew'' .... The fact is that scientific discovery shows that spider silk is in fact a SUPER-STRONG building material, which in terms of strength-to-density ratio, is 5 TIMES STRONGER THAN STEEL, and 100% recyclable, even after it has achieved it's intended 'design requirements'.(to catch food) It's unlike any other known material, never losing it's strength when recycled unlimited times by the female spider! Truly the ULTIMATE BUILDING MATERIAL known to man, but NOT KNOWN to Allah, who claims it's one of the WEAKEST materials for a home! Allah couldn't have been more WRONG!!!! OOPS !!!!! IF HE ONLY KNEW.........

[@foreversurfingthenet2641]

Another false claim is that nobody knew that the moon 'reflected light' until revealed to Mohammed. Unfortunately, the writers of the Quran hadn't done their homework, because Anaxagoras (499 BC - 428 BC) went on record as being the first to propose the idea.!!!! As Allah knows everything, how come he didn't know about Anaxagoras? and how come Allah didn't tell Mohammed that Anaxagoras knew? So much for the Quran's claim that nobody knew except Allah and Mo'!!! The idea that the earth goes round the sun is also ancient. Around 230 b.c., the Greek philosopher Aristarchus suggested that this was the case. Unfortunately his theory remained unproven until 1543, when Nicolaus Copernicus was able to demonstrate the Heliocentric system. However, as the Geocentric explanation was the accepted one in the 7th century, the writer's of the Quran also accepted the Greek Geocentric concept as fact, and stated it clearly in v21-33 ''And it is He Who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon each floating in an orbit.. From an 'observational perspective' this appeared correct, but actually...... was completely wrong! To compound the error, v36-40 makes the huge mistake of stating that the sun and moon share an orbit, because how else could one 'overtake' the other..... unless they shared an orbit? ''Neither it is for the sun to overtake the moon nor can the night outpace the day, each one is floating''....Why would Allah prevent something that could never take place anyway?? Obviously Allah had no idea regarding the positions of the sun and moon!

[@Portofino67]

Alhamdulillah ❤ Thank you for this Video🌹

[@andrewpalim1978]

Thank you Paul and prof Malik!

[@chogorisufi]

Thank you for this invaluable presentation and discussion Paul! Reminds me of the use of logic and 4 logical conclusions that Bediuzzaman Said Nursi had presented in his Epic RisaleNur under topic ‘Immortality of man’s Spirit’. Paul, you might already know of Nursi and his work on responding to the atheistic or non- Existentialist movement in the late 19th and early 20th century. It would be awesome if you could bring that to the audience.

[@abdebnadam8241]

The video is batil. The man spoke from Ashari mystic perspective which is lead many ppl like sufis to pray to other then Allah. His view that Adam might not have been the first man or mated with other monkeys is contradicted in Quran 30 :21 which says your wives are from you!

[@abdebnadam8241]

Allah is 1 & made us needy pairs - Quran 112 :1 & 36 :36. Re: life tree evolution. 1. how did self-copying become mating if no Creator God? 2. & before how did no 1 cell being become dual cell? (no mechanism!) 3. Why's dna & rna co-op languages if no distinct Creator? this evolution's void! Hence life is made by non living separate parts with info via a distinct Creator! Be aware of financed studies for determined outcomes! Term [evolution] has ambiguity, so ppl use that for their own purpose. Micro is like a blue eye having a brown eye one, is ok! Macro is like interbreeding canines is ok. Life tree, is main disagreement, is spontaneous generation w/ goal posts, is fake!!

[@juliankelley6253]

As salam alaykum, I can see brother Shoaib’s point and I can see brother Paul’s point. I think ID does have some issues, but most explanations by people do. But Brother Shoaib is making some pretty bold assumptions. Science can never give an origin of life explanation that holds weight because it is unobservable. The best they can do is guess and if people believe the guess, that is scientism, not science. Brother Paul, continue to post the pictures of butterflies and spiders and what ever else, I think it makes people reflect.

[@RamiAlKhudary]

God bless you brother Paul for discussing this important topic

[@budidayaberuk6144]

Thank you so much, Brother Paul and Dr Shoaib. Truly an eye opening discussion. I was especially struck when Paul pointed out that science has in fact barely explained anything let alone everything. Yet some have already glorified it so much that they think 'if there are things science can't explain then that is where God comes in'

[@salimuddin8051]

Good job Paul👍 . Love you ❤️

[@BloggingTheology]

❤️🙏

[@arabianseagull]

Mr. Paul and Professor Shoaib Ahmad Malik kindly do a session about "the big bang theory of science and Islam"

[@swalihmm]

@@philipcoriolis6614 the earth was still one part with the universe, even if it is younger.

[@Infidelx]

Excellent content as always.

[@asad-kc8zf]

The created at this level of sophistication! Blows my mind regarding the Creator. No words to describe except what He has taught.

[@bigman8673]

I think the overall presentation of creationism, human exceptionalism, and adamic exceptionalism is very well presented and compelling. However, I'm still unsure of creating through "randomness" and chaotic processes because Allah in the Quran keeps on repeating that everything is created with purpose.

[@abdebnadam6237]

children of Adam only mate with each other see Quran 30 :21, and Adam was clearly the first man! view : *Yaqeen Promotes Human Evolution and Calls Me a LIAR!! Debunking Their Nonsense | Part 1*

[@bigman8673]

@@abdebnadam6237 Quran 30:21 "And it is among His signs that He has created for you wives from among yourselves, so that you may find tranquility in them, and He has created love and kindness between you. Surely in this there are signs for a people who reflect." This verse can also talk about your parents and my parents. Because it says "so that you may find tranquility in them, and He has created love and kindness between you". Where is the love and tranquility between a sister and a brother incest relationship (aka son and daughter of Adam a.s.)? Think before posting verses like this where there can be multiple interpretations. And Allah knows best

[@ishxyzaak]

Well what we see as random is just our inability to calculate the order behind it

[@abdebnadam6237]

@@bigman8673 It's talking on Adam & Eve a verse before... that's how, its not about thinking... just simply look at context. before they were born as twins only & mated with others, I think Adam had no hair, so differences did take place as Allah willed, don't assume or contradict Quran! Allah the Creator knows, creation doesn't!

[@bigman8673]

@@abdebnadam6237 dude I can barely understand what you're saying.

[@yorksfolly1255]

43:56 in an something just struck me. In surah baqrah this verse always always fascinated me And (remember) as your Lord said to the Angels, "Surely I am making in the earth a successor." They said, "Will You make therein one who will corrupt in it and shed blood (Literally: bloods) while we (are the ones who) extol (with) Your praise and call You Holy? Literally: hallow for you)" He said, "Surely I know whatever you do not know." In surah baqrah this verse always always fascinated me, but I couldn't quite understand. Its as if the angels have already seen a pervious creation similar to the one that was about to be made (Adam) citing that it would again cause bloodshed and corruption upon the earth. Now the adamic model in this section fits perfectly into that.. the new human Adam and his descendants being brought forth and taking over a the successors of earth as all previous have died out now..

[@dilarasarkar1271]

What a discussion! Mashallah ❤

[@aminahbergliotrolsdorph7557]

سبحان الله.. Pondering over All the knowledge regarding Ancestors Genes research obviously been developing like we can now Find back to ancestors.. So this was deeply helpful regarding Thoughts of.. Thanks 🌏 💭

[@JosephKulik2016]

I've been a student of World Religions my whole life, but even if you don't care a bit about the topic you must concede that this is a very cerebral channel, given all the drivel you find on KZbin. This is a very intellectually challenging channel. No Lightweights here !!! There really aren't too many YT channels that assume that the viewer has a brain and actually wants to use it !!!

[@aminahbergliotrolsdorph7557]

سلام عليكم و جذك الله خيرا.. How interesting.. ما شاء الله.. 🌏 Edited add.. I totally love This.. Born in Norway and *into This* Evolution and "birth" of Secularism .. Thanks Brother Paul.. 🌏 &Also Allah * God* So Sophistication which is Breathtaking.. Yet Logic.. Oceans.. If Holy Ink.. Just A Drop.. الله العليم الحكيم.. His Names and Attributes Essential to me in my World View.. I more and more See Perfection in Islam.. الحمد الله

[@sktalha6384]

Brother Paul I wanna say you WAIHAKA - MAY ALLAH SWT ❤️ BE MERCIFUL TO YOU. SALAAMUN ALAYKUM

[@blackswan.7005]

Very very interesting, thoroughly enjoyed the talk.

[@msdietitian5353]

Thank you brother Paul for doing this video. This very much interest me and I have a lot that I want to bring into this discussion that I hope I will get feedback from you and brother Shoaib Ahmed because my true intention is to improve my understanding of the Quran first and hopefully everyone can benefit from this as well. Let me state my position so its clear from where I am coming from. I believe that evolution is compatible with Quran and Islam. It will take several posts to present my position with Quranic references. I am a Muslim and I do believe the creation of Adam (PBUH), Eve, and Jesus (PBUH) are all miraculous creations. So, please I need rational critique of what I will present as I am very sincere in my intentions.

[@kurdistanijunior]

And you think they will contact you?

[@user-vr9st9ym7v]

When speaking of evolution. Rare are the persons/specialists that can better speak of it better than M. Qunaibi (his channel : kzbin.info And this since he is a biologist and that he passed so much time searching about Islam and evolution theories. Inviting him to your channel would be a great thing! 😃

[@zhangwei1273]

Impressive work of Qunaibi. Especially since mainstream science silences critics of the theory.

[@azkhan5513]

Alhamdulillah Amazing ... thank u Bro Paul

[@HH-bi7yk]

Paul, I love your comments of this often regarding the verses from the Quran, this is exactly my thoughts and that’s all that matters.

[@abdar-rahman6965]

Because Quran is Truth of all Truths; so we must stick only to the Truth of Quran.

[@freeyourmind7538]

Paul! Don't stop your No Design posts, I like them and makes sense to me. I see what shoaib is saying but if a Muslim is ONLY adopting ID then yes, it may cause problems in the future but the truth is, I'm sure people use the ID as a compliment plus contingency argument. It just strengthens the whole, is there a God/Creator concept. Nice one for bringing up the ID discussion, Mr Paul, it was interesting. I totally agree with you that the Quran does point towards design/system around us and also it does point us towards the contingency argument, which is Allah is the eternal, no end, no beginning and all depends upon Allah, which is the contingency argument in a nutshell!

[@jacklin231]

It seems that Professor Malik is a good scientist Muslim very persuasive in discussion I will read your book inshaa Allah happy to meet you Mr .🙋🙋🙋🙋🙋🙋🙋

[@jacklin231]

@Al Mudarabah thanks 👍قناة جميلة انخرطت فيها

[@faysal8597]

Amazing discussion 👏🏾

[@sidelladan3792]

Great rebuttals Paul…. Proof positive that greater study does not always lead to greater knowledge …may Allah guide him …

[@mr.safensound4238]

Subhanallah it becomes clearer here how despite Paul having an non-Muslim background he is far more enlightened both in spiritual understanding, and in reflection of deeper Quranic meanings than the 'expert' Professor. May Allah indeed guide him.

[@sidelladan3792]

@@mr.safensound4238 Absolutely!!

[@goldentrout4811]

This is exactly what is needed for me at least. Professor Shoaib is definitely on the right track here. He can explain what the Quran says and (could) mean, in light of how we approach knowledge. I guess i would consider myself into the 'Human Exceptionalism' position at 29:20 until new evidences pop up. Thank you Paul for the video.

[@abdebnadam8241]

The video is batil. The man spoke from Ashari mystic perspective which is lead many ppl like sufis to pray to other then Allah. beastiality is of T-mud! His view that Adam might not have been the first man or mated with other hominids is contradicted in Quran 30 :21 which says your wives are from you!

[@ah47464]

Sorry my brother I didn't understand this well...what is the position of dr sohaib ? .

[@yesaltafbhat3650]

A huge thank-you!

[@_f_]

Thank you!

[@logicalreasoning1088]

This was a much needed discussion. My perspective is that the evolutionary topic is one that cannot be ignored. Leave it to Paul to bring such topics to Blogging Theology. The propensity of the topic, makes it very relevant. Moreover, this is a topic that can clearly differentiate the Islamic belief from other Abrahamic faiths. I’m surprised that he didn’t discuss the verse in which the Angels question the creation of Adam. Specifically, why will thee create those who will commit mischief upon the earth? So as to indicate that the almighty had created before.

[@logicalreasoning1088]

@@srnp0007 No, like comment on something that has happened in the past. Especially because we are well aware that previous hominids were more Braun then brain. Australopithecus aureus etc… This was the first thought that came to mind when I read this verse. So the almighty says, I know what Yee know not, meaning, we will be a more Intelligent creation!

[@abdebnadam6237]

@@srnp0007 You are making up stuff by saying they predicted the future, maybe they just knew of the jinn... don't do that! Recall Jinn were upset Adam was a special creation made by Allah's Hands.

[@logicalreasoning1088]

If you’re a Muslim reading this verse, your mind won’t go in that direction. “The angels are predicting the future”, as we believe that is only an attribution given to the almighty. On the other hand, if you’re someone looking to find contradictions or gaps, then that will be the first place your sinister mind will go. 1. Knowing that only the almighty is aware of future events. 2. #1 inherently negates the thought of the angels knowing the future. Simply put!

[@michaelfernandez5515]

The problem with Shoaib’s line of reasoning is that the presumptions and reasoning he has used theologically to reach to the conclusion of “la illaha il Allah,” can be deemed weaker than for the evolutionary theory. Dr Qadhi hit the nail on the head when he gave his reasoning for Islam and evolution a couple of years ago.

[@firstnamelastname6976]

What was Yasir qadhi's reasoning?

[@erumrahms7142]

A layperson here🙋‍♀️ and enjoyed this topic so much MashAllah

[@ThePeacefullOasis]

Thank you so much dear Paul and Dr. Shoaib. My heart is at ease now alhamdulillah. Nice and enlightening discussion. Recent noble price on medicine would make this video more relavent

[@dinoraul119]

Really at ease? Dumb argument from shoaib

[@naisa9705]

Sir, can you get Subboor Ahmad, Hamza Tzortzis, Muhammad Hijab, Imran Hussein in your podcast please???

[@dinomar7818]

As an Ash'ari myself, I'm happy to say I've reached the same exact conclusions on my own a couple of years ago and it is reassuring having an expert confirm my point of view. We have no problem with evolution at all, Muslims shouldn't be fighting it. In fact, it shows the greatness of God further. Exactly as Dr. Malik said, the only thing that we are theologically certain of is that our Father, Master and Prophet Adam peace be upon him had no parents and that we are all his children. Learning how God creates things doesn't disprove his existence! You can confirm evolution and appreciate the magnificence of God's creation. Evolution does not negate the Creativity of the Almighty. Nothing is random in reality. Every single particle is under full control of God. The universe is a meticulous system beyond our understanding. Not knowing the purpose of something doesn't disprove God!

[@revimfadli4666]

@@andrewgoldman9019 empirical evidence such as selective breeding & genetic algorithm, you mean?

[@revimfadli4666]

This argument destroys the "evolution vs God" dichotomy

[@revimfadli4666]

Personally, I feel it's more elegant to create a universe with physical laws which allow evolution to emerge. Really shows His power, intelligence, & greatness in designing those laws That said, I don't deny that He could just simply create all these things instantenously. Up to Him, after all

[@dinomar7818]

@@srnp0007 Hello brother. As you know, we take Master Adam pbub to be an exception to evolution since he did not have parents. Nonetheless, even if that wasn't the case that still wouldn't negate God's creativity. By definition God is the Creator, regardless of how He creates. God Almighty made up physics and what we call the laws of nature. Everything is contingent. Everything is constantly created, annihilated and recreated. Everything is continuously new. God is the Ultimate Innovator. "Creativity is a phenomenon whereby something new and valuable is formed." Evolution is essentially the death of a generation and the birth of a new one. It is God who takes life and gives life. Parenthood is essentially an illusion, a legal status. Parents do not create their offspring. God simply choose to link creatures this way. Similarly, it isn't clouds that rain or fire that burn, it is God who burns and brings down rain. He simply choose to link burning with fire. What we observe as regularity in nature is actually God constantly creating in the same sequence so that we infer the legislator from the laws of nature. Properly speaking, however, these are not laws of nature but laws by which God chooses to behave. God is the Absolute Selector and Chooser. And indeed God could make a mouse give birth to an elephant if He wanted. He could bring down rain without clouds. Similarly, He could just create Adam without parents at all. The purpose of creating Adam without parents is honoring him. We are beyond all the other earthly creatures. We are honored by being linked directly to God rather to other animals. This fact does not negate the magnificence and beauty of his creation: stars, birds, horses, humans, planets, galaxies, physics, atoms, etc. Let me explain contingency. When we look at things, they constantly change. For instance, the simplest thing, an atom or a particle, they are continuously moving. Since space is essentially divisible, there must be a smallest possible length ("SPL") and a smallest possible particle ("SPP") occupying that space, otherwise things would not exist. SPP are the building blocks of physical bodies. They cannot "move" between SPLs since they are the smallest length in the first place. Thus, movement is an illusion. When an SPP moves, God Almighty essentially annihilates it from SPL-1 and recreates it in SPL-2. Movement is constant annihilation and recreation, like moving frames in a movie. Now, there are three logical judgements: necessary, possible, impossible. Something that is necessary, it is necessary for and in of itself, otherwise it would be extinguished. For example, a triangle must have three sides, otherwise it wouldn't be a triangle. Something that is impossible is opposite of necessary, it is impossible for and in of itself, otherwise it would be extinguished. For example, it is impossible for a triangle to have only two sides. Something that is possible, can be affirmed or negated with no issue. For example, a triangle may be blue or not blue. Something that may or may not exist is called contingent. Since physical bodies are constantly getting annihilated and recreated from nothing, then every single thing didn't exist at some point. Thus we cannot say they must exist, because they actually didn't exist at some point. If they must exist, then they would have always existed. We cannot say they must not exist, because they actually existed. If they mustn't exist, they would never exist. Therefore, we can conclude that they may or may not exist. These two possibilities are equal. So we ask a question, if these two possibilities are equal, why are they existing rather than not existing? What changed the balance? What favored its existence over its non existence? There must be an ultimate chooser. Since things exist rather not existing, there must be someone who chose or favored or gave preponderance to their existence over their nonexistence, and thus their existence prevailed over their nonexistence, even though they were initially equal. We call this someone The God. Someone who must exist, thus always existed. Someone who is absolutely capable of making anything exist. Someone who is absolutely dominant over every single thing and continuously keeps it existing rather not existing and changes their states. When something changes, The God pretty much stops making it exist, then creates it again in a different way or place. So that's what we mean when we say God is the Absolute Creator.

[@ultimatemiracle1981]

@@srnp0007 We share common ancestors with chimps including adam.

[@kakahass]

Shoaib is a gem in the evolution conversation

[@abdullahk8691]

Thanks for video Paul and guest. Which Qur'an translation says the earth is 6,000 years old? I've never read one. Did he mean Bibles? 7:05 Muslims have never claimed all species were created separately and in one go. What Muslims have claimed is Adam was a unique individual and humans enjoy a specific status in terms of being God's viceroy on Earth. 8:18

[@fahimqazi4638]

2. Secondly, there are circular dependencies that are impossible to resolve. For example, which came first: the DNA or the protein? Can’t have DNA without protein. Can’t have protein without DNA. James Watson, the Rockstar of genetics, struggled with this question and failed to come up with a good answer for this. There must be an external actor that created these two simultaneously. To me, that’s God. Which came first: the laws or the organisms that obey the laws? Can’t have laws without the obedient organisms. Can’t have organisms without the laws that govern their behavior. There must be an external actor that created these two simultaneously. To me, that’s God. You cannot have a male without a female. Likewise, you cannot have a female without a male. How did the animals go from asexual to sexual? Natural selection (or any other mechanism of evolution) cannot go from asexual to sexual reproduction. It’s impossible. To believe otherwise is irrational. Not to mention that natural selection takes the least path of resistance. It cannot switch from asexual to sexual just like that. Not to mention it would be extremely inefficient and take too much work and energy. Our awe-inspiring universe too contains examples of such circular dependencies. Matter and antimatter cannot coexist in the same physical space because if they come into contact, they annihilate each other. Yet, that’s exactly what happened in the beginning phases of the universe. Equal amounts of matter and antimatter were created after the Big Bang. The Standard Model of particle physics - which accurately describes all the particles and interactions that make up our universe - says our universe should NOT exist! What brought it into existence? There must be an external power that stopped matter and antimatter from killing each other. For me, that’s Allah. The All-Powerful. The All-Knowing. The only Creator of the heavens and the earth. All these circular dependencies only prove the existence of a Creator. (Contine on to the next comment)

[@foreversurfingthenet2641]

Fahim Qazi I think your claim that Allah is 'all knowing' is easily disproved...in Verse 29-41 ''The example of those who take allies other than Allah is like that of the spider who takes a home, and indeed, the weakest of homes is the home of the spider, if they only knew'' .... The actual fact is that scientific discovery shows that the reverse is true....spider silk is a super-strong building material, which in terms of strength-to-density ratio, is 5 times stronger than steel, and 100% recyclable, even after it has achieved it's intended 'design requirements'.(to catch food) It's unlike any other known natural material, never losing it's strength when recycled unlimited times by the female spider! Truly the ultimate natural building material known to man, but clearly, NOT KNOWN by Allah, who claims it's one of the weakest materials for a home! Allah couldn't have been more wrong!!!! Oops !!!!! If only Allah was all knowing..

[@nashf6128]

@@BaldTom define self-replication

[@nashf6128]

@@BaldTom define that

[@saifklee178]

@@foreversurfingthenet2641 Its a Beautiful parable. The spiders home is a deathtrap and a killing house, both for the spider itself as the female spider hunts down and eats the male after mating (and others spiders) and it is a deadly trap for Its visitors. Its not like an ants nets or a bee hive as they are not built to kill, paralyze etc., but rather functions as a real safe home for entire colonies. The Quran is using a parable in People taking protectors other than God, and they will find the protection as weak as spiders house, providing neither shelter or nourishment but rather find one self on unsteady grounds providing No shelter from rain, cold, heat, wind or predators, and a death trap by the host itself. So Yea, would you consider it a strong shelter or weak?

[@fahimqazi4638]

@@foreversurfingthenet2641 Even a child knows spider home is extremely weak. You can easily break it with the slightest effort. That's the point of the verse. You're misreading and misinterpreting the verse to push your agenda.

[@kenadidosman7056]

Amazing.thank you

[@KurdGamers2]

Really i enjoy this podcast

[@falsesectslikeshiaarejudeo6543]

Abu Huraira reported that Allah's Messenger (ﷺ peace and blessings be upon him) took hold of my hands and said: Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, created the clay on Sabt-Day and He created the mountains on Ahad-Day and He created the trees on Ithnayn-day and He created the things entailing labour on Thulatha-day and created light on Arba'a-day and He caused the animals to spread on Khamis-day **and created Adam (peace be upon him) after 'Asr on Jumma'a; the last creation at the last hour of the hours of Juma'a,** i. e. between afternoon and night. This hadith is narrated through another chain of transmitters. - Muslim 2789, Book Judgement Day, Jannah & Nar!

[@abdelhakyac7285]

you're too close minded to see that even this can happen with a common ancestry.... by the way im not a believer in evolution because i cant see a good evidence of it, but still i dont see how it can alter mainstream islamic aqeedah, it has nothing to do with it, except if people are too close minded to think their superficial opinion on any text is the only possible way...... which proven false fooooor so many other texts

[@falsesectslikeshiaarejudeo6543]

@@abdelhakyac7285 Only you seem close minded! you say "can happen with a common ancestry" then you say " i cant see a good evidence of it" all you do is contradicting yourself here & elsewhere. Thanks for proving who believe in tree of life evolution defeat themselves!

[@falsesectslikeshiaarejudeo6543]

@@abdelhakyac7285 Adam's kids only mate with other ones in Quran 30 :21! Quran 3 :7 - says follow whats clear first, & those with disease don't... I'm focus not close minded! Somethings are simple. if christians say 1+1+1=1, its delusion, it's not about open mind, you sound immature like them, fix up!

[@aal-e-ahmadhussain3123]

What’s the proof from Quran and Sunnah that all of this happened during the same week? Is it possible that each thing happened on that day but in a different week, perhaps with some gap of time in between?

[@falsesectslikeshiaarejudeo6543]

@@aal-e-ahmadhussain3123 To keep it simple the Quran said it was made in the universe was made in 6 days... 2 for this and 2/4 for that... etc. You would have to look at ayat for details, very apparent its altogether then! The point is not to contradict Quran and Sunnah...

[@zafarpasha01]

Salaam brother Paul and Shoaib. Thank for sharing your thoughts on this subject and making the effort to present it. I have few comments and hope they are not taken as negative criticism. First of all, the translation read by Paul of the Quran Ayaas are incorrect. In fact in the second Ayaa there is no mention of a man or a women in the arabic text. Furthermore. I am a little surprised of brother shoaib taking someone else`s theological framework as a reference. The holy book advises against that and asks every person to read for them selves and comprehend. I understand that Arabic might not be your main language, but I do expect you to read any translation of the holy book with some doubt as it reflects only the trnaslators understanding of the original text. After watching the whole video I realized that many of the words mentioned from the holy book were not truly understood. For instance, what's the meaning of Bashar, Insaan, Nafs, Rooh, Khalk, and what's the difference between then. Also, if you read the verse where Allah almighty says to the angels that he is going to create Adam, just look at the angels` response. There you will have a clue on the ancestry of Adam. With regards to evolution vs creation. I never understood that argument. Let me give a simple example to explain my point. Please imagine finding four fossils, Tree, log, plank, and a chair. I know evolution is about living things. But This is just to simplify my point. So those four fossils clearly show evolution. But the chair is part of a creation. Therefore, I don't really understand what the argument is. Evolution is a observational science, creation is about design, purpose the forces behind things. They are two different things. In the holy book it says, walk the earth and see how we started creation. Therefore, doing research and learning and coming up with theories is what allah wants us todo. The holy book/Quran is a book of guidance and not science. Therefore we should take that guidance and do our research and learning. There are few more verses which I think are very relevant to this discussion but were not referenced. One of them is that "we created everything from water. By the way the word Khalk, that gets translated as creation. In fact in Arabic it means Design. As in Khalaka fa Sawwa. Thank you for making the Book free to download. I will definitely read it. Kind regards

[@zafarpasha01]

@Al Mudarabah Salaam Brother and thank you for your kind words. And thank you for sharing those links. Is the voice in the narration yours? I watched all the Links in Arabic, but haven’t had the time to watch the English ones yet. I truly appreciate you taking the time to create such content. In fact, there is so much good and intelligent content on Islam out there on KZbin but unfortunately it’s almost all in Arabic. I have been asked and also been tempted to translate some of that content into English. But I know how mammoth of a task that is and I am not sure I can dedicate that much time. Hence my appreciation for your effort and effort of all those people who try and produce such work and share it. After watching the videos I would like to draw your attention to few points. Bashar (بشر) is the name of our Specifies. This species was created through evolution over a very long time to become Bashar. Fa Ethaa (فاذا) indicates a very long time. And this was the species that the Angels already knew and how they lived. They were may be no different to other animal species in thier behaviour. Now what makes the Bashar into Insaan is the Rooh (روح). And our Prophet Adam was the first Bashar who was given Rooh. And this made him into an Insaan (Human) Therefore, the Rooh is the intelligence and consciousness that makes us Insaan (Human) and makes us superior to many things. A lot of times Rooh and Nafs are confused. Roohs is the intelligence that makes mankind Human. and Nafs is just being alive. Hence all living things have Nafs but only humans have Nafs and Rooh. With the Kindest regards brother.

[@zafarpasha01]

@Al Mudarabah Salaam Brother, thank you for taking the time to reply. Hope you are well. I would kindly highlight the following points to your kind attention. also please note, In the Ayaas i am qouting, I am replacing the English translated word to the Arabic text, BASHAR and INSAAN as per the original Arabic in the holy book just to clarify the point. 1- In Al-Rum 30:20 “One of His signs is that He created you from dust, then-behold!-you are BASHAR spreading over ˹the earth” 2- In Surat Sad Ayaa 38:71-72 “Behold, thy Lord said to the angels: "I am about to create BASHAR from clay. "When I have fashioned him (in due proportion) breathed and into him of My spirit (ROOH), fall ye down in obeisance unto him." The above Ayaas state the creation of Bashar was first and then after a long time there was this breathing the Rooh (Spirit) into this Bashar and then the angels were asked to fall ye down in obeisance unto him. Therefore, once Allah all mighty breathes the Rooh (Spirit)) into this Bashar then this Bashar will become ADAM. 3- The BASHAR after Breathing the Rooh (Spirit) becomes this intelligent being who now has the ability to comprehend and differentiate between good and evil. 4- Hence all reference in the holy book whenever referring to or talking to an intelligent being, the word Insaan is used and not Bashar. As an example: Al Hashr 59:16 “The like of [what happens] when Satan says unto INSAAN, “Deny the truth!” - but as soon as [INSAAN] has denied the truth, [Satan] says, “Behold, I am not responsible for thee: behold, I fear God, the Sustainer of all the worlds!” Qaf 50:16 NOW, VERILY, it is We who have created INSAAN, and We know what his innermost self-whispers within him: for We are closer to him than his neck-vein I am sure you already know there are many examples in the holy book where the word Insaan is used whenever there is reference to intelligent being and not Bashar. But we are all BASHAR, including Prophet Adam as that’s or species. Kindest regards.

[@zafarpasha01]

@Al Mudarabah Salaam Brother, Allah all Mighty created all forms of life. And these forms of life, evolved over a very long time to become various species that we have today and also including some that have become extinct. This process of evolution is part of Allah`s Creation. One of these species developed further where it could now stand on two feet. This species Allah calls in the holly book as Bashar. This is Equivalent to Homo erectus Up to this point in time and development, the species Bashar was no different to other animals in their behaviour I.e., no understanding of wrong and right or have sense of morality. This Species of Bashar over time spread all over the earth as per the Ayaa. Then Allah wanted to Breath Rooh into this Bashar Species. When Allah all mighty carried out the breathing of the Rooh (Spirit) into this Bashar, this Bashar with Rooh was now also called Adam. From Adam onwards, all Bashar had Rooh. This is equivalent to homo sapiens/humans. This new further enhanced Bashar with Rooh is what’s also called Insaan. (Human) Therefore, ALL INSAANs ARE BASHAR but with added Rooh. Hence, All Insaans, including Adam are all Bashar as species, but are also called Insaan from an intelligence and consciousness point of view. I don’t disagree with you on the Ayaas and their content, but this is how I see them all interrelated. If you have a different take on this I would interested to hear. Especially around the relationship between Bashar, Adam and Insaan from the holly book. Kindest regards

[@zafarpasha01]

@Al Mudarabah of course i dont mind. yes i do. i speak, read and write arabic as a first Language. kind regards

[@kkm227]

very nice interview, It was more complete discussion if there was someone debating him on his conclusions.

[@wahyu-adji]

بارك الله فيكم

[@muhammadbenjuraij7734]

Salams Paul. Firstly I must say how pleased I am to receive this video in my notifications simply because of the importance of dealing with this subject where Muslims and other faiths are concerned. Secondly I was really pleasantly surprised by your guest speaker and his comformation and assertion that Sunni Islam comprises of three mutually accepted theological schools 1) Matureedia 2): Asharia. 3): Al-Atharia the last being the school that I personally identify with and embrace. I say this because unfortunately these days each of these 3 schools are too busy claiming that they alone represent the acceptable sunni creed and anyone else are outside of the fold of sunni Islam. As a Hanbali in creed and fiqh this makes me uneasy because when I look into the scholars found in my chains of transmission and their athbaat (personal recorded collections of their accademic lineages and narrations) I find that these scholars some of whom the fatwa of the mathab is entrusted to like Imam Al-Buhooti and their students and followers like Imam Saffaareeni, were not only practitioners of correct tasawwuf but also affirmed the validity of these three theological schools and that they collectively represent the accepted theological schools of sunni Islam. To hear this being affirmed by the speaker shows me that A) he is intelligent and B) also intelligent enough not to be swayed by the sweeping infectious exclusivity that represents part of the partisanship that is clearly prohibited in the Quran and Sunnah. As for his findings regards evolution then I must say how impressed I am at how he has injected so many acceptable possibilities of interpretation that he has basically narrowed the available scope for Muslims to declare each other as corrupt or out of the fold. I appreciate his view on not wanting to box himself in when it comes to intelligent design however the Quran is clear that there is an amazing design and a perfect designer but I appreciate that he means to protect Muslims from self obligation themselves with things that in reality are not in conflict with the Quran. However paul you are right and I was saying the same things to myself until he made the issue clear regarding potential future theological traps. Another great installment paul well done :) wa Salam

[@muhammadbenjuraij7734]

@Al Mudarabah I’m not sure if I agree with that but I accept the possibilities, further more if we are created from clay i.e., matter then it would make sense that is very feasible that Allah created all life forms from the same matter and hence a biological connection between species would exist ,however I would advise against clinging too firmly to one theory because after all its just a theory and it’s enough as Muslims to know that Allah is the creator no matter how he chooses to create wether in stages like in the womb or all in one go it matters not and this was the point he was making.

[@ykn7018]

Muslim scholars hundreds of years before Darwin had alluded to evolution. Ibn Khaldun even explicitly stated that the world of human came into being from the world of monkeys. Could you discuss also on these positions of the early muslim scholars ? How about if we view Adam and Eve as allegorical ie. as symbols of the birth of human civilization instead of biological birth?

[@fikarrusdiawan9562]

😕

[@abdullahk8691]

You can do that if you wish. The only problem is science often changes its mind. When it does your theory will have no home left!

[@user-kj8yl6sn2z]

Any opinion that contradicts the texts of the Qur’an has its rightful place in the trash. Read the beginning of Surah Ar-Rahman and Surat Al-Mulk and read Surat Al-Baqarah you will see all the absolute truth. Ibn Khaldun is a sociologist, not a religious scholar.

[@Happy-ln5ps]

وفقكم الله جميعا

[@tajabdullah.malaysia]

🎉❤Masy'Allah Alhamdulillah syukur rezeki kita seluas hamparan langit biru aamiin 🎉❤❤

[@magnus8704]

Amazing conversation. There are many mistakes and scarecrows muslims and non-muslims (specially religious people) commit when they talk about this theme. This was much needed.

[@QuranicIslam]

I agree that ID is susceptible to God of the Gaps argument ... and I think that in fact we will one day discover and know and describe, scientifically, the origins of life. The Qur'an explicitly says that that is a possibility ... In fact God commands us to discover that; (قُلۡ سِیرُوا۟ فِی ٱلۡأَرۡضِ فَٱنظُرُوا۟ كَیۡفَ بَدَأَ ٱلۡخَلۡقَۚ ثُمَّ ٱللَّهُ یُنشِئُ ٱلنَّشۡأَةَ ٱلۡـَٔاخِرَةَۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَیۡءࣲ قَدِیرࣱ) [Surah Al-Ankabut 20] *Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “Travel throughout the earth and SEE how He originated the creation, then Allah will bring it into being one more time. Surely Allah is Most Capable of everything*

[@QuranicIslam]

@Al Mudarabah Thank you. I'll take a look

[@QuranicIslam]

@Al Mudarabah 👍 thank you and Jazakallah

[@detectiveandspynovels7140]

1:14:08 Contingency is neither impossible nor necessary. An incontingent is either impossible or necessary. 1:15:51

[@anatulymaimany]

When Soahib was talking about Adam execptionalism it reminded of Yajuj and Majuj. Yanuj Majuj are also like human but not completely human beings to my knowledge.

[@bjornicjonisson3362]

As someone who studied Philoshopy of science and a Muslim too, I believe "evolution" in non human creatures like animals, and plants. But for Human I believe we are not from evolution products, we are as we are from the very beginning.

[@bjornicjonisson3362]

@@Edward-bm7vw Well thats what you believe. Human can study same source and have different outcome. Believe what you believe

[@Kimeikus]

So you are on the human exceptionalism. Human exceptionalism view is that animals evolved but not humans.

[@aliammar2926]

Evolution can happen but within same species. There was no common ancestors and you cannot prove it. Let's say there was a common ancestor for a dog, cat, horse, chimpanzee, human thete should be millions of fossils for the first ancestor and then there should be millioms of fossiles available for intermediate species that evolved from common ancestors to lets say dogs it's not possible that the common ancestor directly evolved into dog there must ne stages and diffrtent evolutio into a lot of stages before it reached to dog or an ancestor of dog but there is no scientific evidence for such fossils